St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1887-12-09
A STOCK YARDS HOMICIDE.
The Supreme Court Sustains the
Ruling in the Case of Peter
johnson, Convicted of Man
slaughter

The Supreme Court Sustains the
Ruling in the Case of Peter
johnson, Convicted of Man
slaughter.
The supreme court also sent in a de-
ciSiOn refusing to grant a new trial to
Peter johnson, who was convicted of
manslaughter for killing James Morrow
at the South st. Paul stock yards about
a year ago. Morrow was found one Sat
urday night lying in the street dead,
from injuries inflicted with bloody
knife, which was found Hear by. john
son was arrested the Sunday following
with two others, who had been seen in
company with the dead man shortly be-
fore he was killed, all three being more
or less intoxicated. The three men were
indicted for murder in the first degree.
| They were tried at Hastings. as
the killing had been done Just
within the Dakota county line.
The evidence was largely circumstan-
tial, but the jury brought in verdict as
above stated. The appeal was taken
chiefly on the ground of technical irreg
ularities i'll the Indictment and the
charge to the jury. Judge Mitchell dis
SCENTS from the rest of the judges and
would grant new trial on the ground
that there is not sufficient evidence to
warrant a conviction. This is the Syl-
labus:
State of Minnesota, respondent, VS..
Peter johnson. appellant.
SyllabuS-An Indictment for murder
in the first degree, in the form given in
chapter los, general statutes 1878, is good
under the criminal code. An Indictment
against two or more persons may chrnge
the act to have been done by them col
lectively. Putting the date when and
place where found, at the end of
an Indictment, after the words
against the, peace. and dignity
of the state of Minnesota"
does not vitiate it,-such date and place
are no part of the Indictment. Evidence
held sufficient to sustain the verdict.
Divers assignments of error upon eX-
cepti0ns to evidence and refusalS to adj
nit evidence soverruled. Requests to
charge held not to present the question
whether one who does not himself strike
the blow may be convicted of mani
slaughter in the first degree. a request
to charge that if a single fact proved to
the satisfaction of the jury was incOn-
sistent with defendants guilt he should
be acquitted, rightly refused.
In its charge to the jury the court
n6cUx IlOU Sldlt lilt ItdSOll, lOI tlc
that guilt must be proved beyond rea-
sOnable doubt, if it state the rule corr
rectly. Order affirmed.
GILFILLAN, j.
| dissent for the reason that, in my
Judgment, the evidence was not Suffi+
!. Gent to warrant a conviction. 1t would
"Subserye no good purpose to refer to the
testimony futher than to say that it
seems to me that the opinion of the
court does not give full and accurate
statement of the facts as they appear
from the whole case. MITCHELL, j.
ANOTHER CASE.
Following is the syllabus in another
minor case turned in yesterday.
Henry c.. Davis, respondent. VS.. The
Board Of County Commissioners of LIE
Sueur county. appellant.
SyllabuS-A sheriff or constable is en-
titled to mileage for travelling to serve a
criminal warrant although, by no fault
of his, he fail to serveit. Order affirmed.
GILFILLAN, {. j.
SUPREME COURT.
J. c. Stemper, respondent, VS.. Fl. IL.
Higgins, appellant; argued and sub
mitted.
Thomas Coleman VS.. The st. Paul,
Minneapolis q Manitoba Railway Com
pany; submitted on briefs.